| If you hate it so much, watch something else. New wave feminists and others with similarly bad takes have effectively ruined other entertainment mediums with their backwards logic and now they want to ruin anime and manga too, because "I don't need no man." |
| "More than the cherry blossoms, Inviting a wind to blow them away, I am wondering what to do, With the remaining springtime." -Asano Naganori |
shintai88 said: And I don't believe many have issues with those kind of characters, at least I don't. Beside FMA has variety of female characters, from physically strong to loving family oriented woman, and that's imo the key part. And you have moments where a female character saves a male character and vice versa, so none of them ever really stepped back to make more room for a male character.Its not rare to find a show where a strong women still wants to be protected. I mean look at FMA, Izumi curtis is strong, but she can appreciate when her husband steps into shield her and protect her. Its great when Women can protect their men. not a common troupe. but when its there is great. |
 |
Aditya_Dobhada said: SofiaBulga said: Have you watched Jujutsu Kaisen, or Kimetsu no Yaiba? If you have, then you know this trope isn't as influential as it was. It's not gone, but there is less of it. Plus it depends on the anime you watch, how often you see the trope. Yeah Jjk is an exception and I am aware of it. Aditya_Dobhada said: SofiaBulga said: Have you watched Jujutsu Kaisen, or Kimetsu no Yaiba? If you have, then you know this trope isn't as influential as it was. It's not gone, but there is less of it. Plus it depends on the anime you watch, how often you see the trope. Yeah Jjk is an exception and I am aware of it. Thank you for recognising it, katsucats another user here tore me a new one when quoting my comment. |
 |
| Not a problem in this medium. There is literally thousands of animes to choose from, surely there are several that fits your tastes, and other titles will fit other people's tastes :) |
| I agree with ya. Here r some strong female characters :- Hinata Erza Hancock Fubuki |
 “If you want to know who you are, you have to look at your real self and acknowledge what you see.” - Itachi Uchiha “Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance, you must keep moving.” — Albert Einstein  |
| @LostSpectre You’re saying the same thing in different words over and over again. The fact that you purport to be “well-researched”, and then take the amazingly anti-intellectual stance of I'll admit, I didn't quite elaborate on my point, but feminist "objectification" is not a valid concept. in the same breath really demonstrates your complete inability to so much as attempt to understand what other people are saying and your lack of self-awarenss. “I do my own research!” you cry, having decided before even entering the conversation that the literal idea of research in opposition to yours is invalid. “I know what the feminists think”, you declare, having just finished reading the comments section of a video of a guy ranting about Anita Sarkeesian for 40 minutes. That’s just not true, it's used almost exclusively to women. It is not commonly used to discuss portrayals of men. It actually is true. Don’t blame me if your “research” hasn’t carried you far enough to have any actual literacy in the term’s usage. There's no imaginary argument, google "objectified" and you will find definitions expanded to sexual objectification, not to mention that most examples will be about women. Expanded to… meaning, uh, it doesn’t inherently mean that? And congratulations, you have correctly identified that the term is very frequently (not always) used to refer to women, but the thing is: Also, note how you said person, that means an actual human, and not a fictional character. You’re hung up on this bullshit about how it can’t be objectification because fictional characters are objects. I don’t know to explain to this to your nihilistic sensibilities, but listen, there’s value in abstraction when we’re talking about fiction. If I said “this character is a carpenter”, the natural response would be, “oh, okay”, and not, “Ummm, ackshually, he’s not a carpenter. He’s not because he’s an object. He’s not real. Carpenters in fiction are not the same as carpenters in real life.” Well, I guess we can’t call him a carpenter then. Oh well, I guess we’ll have to come up with a whole new term that describes fictional carpenters. I guess this story about a carpenter also literally can’t say anything about carpenters in real life, because fiction never commentates on reality. Do you think if I say “this character is a bad person”, I’m literally saying they’re an actual person with autonomy who can make morally bad decisions? Are you that far gone? If it was only offensive to the objectified state of a woman, and not a real woman herself, there would be no issue. If this weren't true then there wouldn't have been such a feminist outcry in past years against objectification in magazines, games, comics, movies, etc. Yep, no reason at all. Women can’t want to see themselves better represented in media unless they’re taking a narrow predetermined stance about it that you’ve decided is invalid by nature. Golly, that sure takes the need away for you actually think critically about their arguments, doesn’t it? How convenient! Why would I present an argument based on the inherent hypocrisy of feminism to someone who can't even seem to comprehend that the comment I replied to was only in regard to the feminist interpretation of the word, you actually tried to argue as if my point was that it's nonsense to approach fiction with realism or thought just because the characters are all "objects". Okay, I’ll dumb it down one more time. If you can’t understand this, then I don’t believe there’s any room for our conversation to continue. Your interpretation of what the word means is incorrect and narrow-minded. I am arguing against you because I believe that to be the case. You are presenting it as unreasonable to complain about objectification. This is because you believe characters are objects. I rebutted by demonstrating why nobody would want to read stories about actual objects. (The point, in case you don’t understand, is that objectification makes the characters subject to it as interesting as literal, physical, real-life objects.) In doing so, I concisely explained a valid reason for feminists, and in fact, anyone who appreciates art, to dislike objectification. You have ignored this repeatedly. You have instead attached your own meaning to the word, and decided that it actually always means [meaning you’ve ascribed to it]. I am still waiting for your excuse, incidentally. It doesn't matter why you don't like something in fiction, but when the subject is based on perceived sexism against women, AND commonly recognizable feminist terminology is used, don't be surprised if that subject gets brought up. Okay, and don’t be surprised when someone else accuses you of being a man yelling at clouds when you decide to bring it up like somehow wins you an argument that wasn’t being made. It would be great if we could discuss these sort of tropes as they pertain to fiction/writing, and for that to not draw upon feminist ideology, but that's a pipe dream. This is so goddamn funny on multiple levels. Yeah, it would be great, too bad it didn’t happen in this thread already. Too bad the feminists are always wrong and that makes me always right. wistful sigh Oh, and you have the wrong idea about how "objectification" is viewed. The point is not that fictional sexism is literally as bad as "calling a woman a slut" it's that this fictional sexism literally translates to real sexism against women. Oh, they think it’s sexist? Like, the way calling a woman a slut is sexist? You know what I said about the whole “bad person” thing? I’m starting to think you would unironically believe that, given your inability to process an extremely basic metaphor. |
 |
| Being objectified is a strong statement. Im gonna regret saying this but... While yeah, its cool and all that some women prefer standing up for themselves and not needing saving or protecting at any time but... admit it or not, majority of girls/women (ones that arent baited by whatever the hell is going on in the west and their beliefs) likes being protected, it turns them on, it makes them feel special, it makes them feel safe around you, and a lot of men in turn, are built, programmed to want to protect anything they can, be it a little animal, a baby, a kid and yes even a woman, men like that. Anyways we literally got that troupe airing right now, albeit gender swapped tho. Have you heard of Shikimori and her femboi bf? |
  |
| MALer: *has two anime girls dressed as playboy bunnies in his avatar* Also MALer: "ObJeCtIfIcAtIoN iN aNiMe IsN't ReAl!" -Stray said: Being objectified is a strong statement. Im gonna regret saying this but... While yeah, its cool and all that some women prefer standing up for themselves and not needing saving or protecting at any time but... admit it or not, majority of girls/women (ones that arent baited by whatever the hell is going on in the west and their beliefs) likes being protected, it turns them on, it makes them feel special, it makes them feel safe around you, and a lot of men in turn, are built, programmed to want to protect anything they can, be it a little animal, a baby, a kid and yes even a woman, men like that. Anyways we literally got that troupe airing right now, albeit gender swapped tho. Have you heard of Shikimori and her femboi bf? Gender: Male Activity: telling women how they feel and think Method of choice: Comparing them to pets o/ |
 |
| Oh sorry, looks like I somehow forgot to log off my Twitter account. Weird. |
| @MoltenLemonMeta -Nope. We're starting back from the beginning. You tell me why my original statement is false, because I don't think you actually understand what it meant in the first place. Then I'll gladly explain where your misunderstanding lies, because so far as I can tell, all of your responses to me are still being based on your false assumptions. You have literally failed to understand the reason an object and a person are directly incomparable, aside from throwing all this meaningless garbage at me about how complex characters are worthless if they're just "objects", none of which is actually true. I'll even give you a hint, examine the difference between viewing a real person as purely a sex object, and then do the same for that person in a porno. Oh, and here's an article that may be helpful to you. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fictional-entities/#:~:text=Fictional%20characters%20belong%20to%20the,as%20fictional%20places%20 |
LostSpectreMay 5, 2022 10:08 AM
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
| @LostSpectre Oh, no, I don’t think I will. I have already explained the state of the argument in such clear and easy language a third grader could understand it. The blame- if it’s true that really don’t understand it, and you’re not simply attempting to avoid addressing my points- lies squarely at your feet. So I’ll give you a choice: You can walk this whole thing back, delete your comment, and try harder. We can go on debating this, and perhaps we can expand our dialogue to include discussion of your very revealing comments about women in magazines, film, and pornography- real women, I hope you understand, even if the characters they portray are not. Or you can keep insisting I explain myself, in which case I’ll simply have to repeat myself: “If you can’t understand this, then I don’t believe there’s any room for this conversation to continue”, and you can take solace in the fact that your sheer idiocy was too much for me to overcome. Your pick! |
|
MoltenLemonMeta said: How about you actually learn the difference between a living person and a fictional object/entity. That might alleviate some of your confusion.@LostSpectre Oh, no, I don’t think I will. I have already explained the state of the argument in such clear and easy language a third grader could understand it. The blame- if it’s true that really don’t understand it, and you’re not simply attempting to avoid addressing my points- lies squarely at your feet. So I’ll give you a choice: You can walk this whole thing back, delete your comment, and try harder. We can go on debating this, and perhaps we can expand our dialogue to include discussion of your very revealing comments about women in magazines, film, and pornography- real women, I hope you understand, even if the characters they portray are not. Or you can keep insisting I explain myself, in which case I’ll simply have to repeat myself: “If you can’t understand this, then I don’t believe there’s any room for this conversation to continue”, and you can take solace in the fact that your sheer idiocy was too much for me to overcome. Your pick! https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fictional-entities/#:~:text=Fictional%20characters%20belong%20to%20the,as%20fictional%20places%20 Oh, and feel free to tell me what my comments reveal, even though you've yet to get past the stage of understanding the difference between objects/people. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
LostSpectre said: MoltenLemonMeta said: How about you actually learn the difference between a living person and a fictional object/entity. That might alleviate some of your confusion.@LostSpectre Oh, no, I don’t think I will. I have already explained the state of the argument in such clear and easy language a third grader could understand it. The blame- if it’s true that really don’t understand it, and you’re not simply attempting to avoid addressing my points- lies squarely at your feet. So I’ll give you a choice: You can walk this whole thing back, delete your comment, and try harder. We can go on debating this, and perhaps we can expand our dialogue to include discussion of your very revealing comments about women in magazines, film, and pornography- real women, I hope you understand, even if the characters they portray are not. Or you can keep insisting I explain myself, in which case I’ll simply have to repeat myself: “If you can’t understand this, then I don’t believe there’s any room for this conversation to continue”, and you can take solace in the fact that your sheer idiocy was too much for me to overcome. Your pick! https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fictional-entities/#:~:text=Fictional%20characters%20belong%20to%20the,as%20fictional%20places%20 Oh, and feel free to tell me what my comments reveal, even though you've yet to get past the stage of understanding the difference between objects/people. Well, you haven’t deleted your comment, and this isn’t “trying harder” by any stretch of the imagination, so I must conclude you’ve taken the latter option, and have decided to dissuade me from arguing by dodging my points even harder, and doubling down on your own stupidity. Fair enough, then. I don’t have the patience to be your English teacher, so kindly consider this discussion over. |
|
Deathko said: Objectification as a concept is a falsehood when applied to fiction or fictional representations. It's inherently sex-shaming to women, but there's power in victimhood, so the blame is merely shifted onto men for how they view women, even though viewing a woman in an objectified state and viewing a literal woman are fundamentally different. Everything circles back to the idea that women can be degraded on the basis of sexuality in ways that men are not similarly shamed by. MALer: *has two anime girls dressed as playboy bunnies in his avatar* Also MALer: "ObJeCtIfIcAtIoN iN aNiMe IsN't ReAl!" Sure, it's dumb for a half-naked woman to sell a burger, but it should not be an indictment on female sexuality. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
| The villain has the heroine chained up with with magic absorbing metal, when the hero arrives and frees her. She then tells him she can handle the villain on her own, and then does. So, the hero just stood there and watched? Wouldn't the story be better served by the heroine's supporting cast freeing her? Thus reminding the audience of the one person who can win the day? Now I get the bit about not all fights have to be the main fight, but then I gotta ask for examples. What show where the male lead had to save his harem from every thug, villain and fiend they encountered? |
MAFTY - No Exceptions To The Rules |
MoltenLemonMeta said: Why would I delete my comments? You've already quoted them. Did you delete your comments quoting me? I'm not the one who needs to convince you that the treatment of a fictional entity should not be representative towards real humans that it depicts, that drawing those kinds of correlations between fiction/reality is insane. You're the one who should actually be trying to argue why a half-naked superhero is somehow offensive to all women, even when this is purely sex-shaming rhetoric in which the blame is deflected onto men.Well, you haven’t deleted your comment, and this isn’t “trying harder” by any stretch of the imagination, so I must conclude you’ve taken the latter option, and have decided to dissuade me from arguing by dodging my points even harder, and doubling down on your own stupidity. Fair enough, then. I don’t have the patience to be your English teacher, so kindly consider this discussion over. But sure, walk away pretending that you've actually done anything here besides misunderstand the entire argument from the onset. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
| I just gotta say, someone saying "delete your comments" as a ultimatum for the end of an internet argument they started is one of the funniest things I've seen on MAL. |
  |
| @LostSpectre Why would I delete my comments? You've already quoted them. You deleted your very first comment replying to me, so I had assumed it wouldn’t matter, though yes, I would’ve deleted it in order to restart the conversation. But yes, you’re right! You don’t need to convince me that: the treatment of a fictional entity should not be representative towards real humans that it depicts, that drawing those kinds of correlations between fiction/reality is insane. Because, you know, that’s not the point in contention here. I deliberately avoided that subject (see my third post) because I don’t care about discussing it in this context. Oh, but, wait. I should be arguing that: a half-naked superhero is somehow offensive to all women, even when this is purely sex-shaming rhetoric in which the blame is deflected onto men. Sorry, from now on, I’ll stop trying to argue about what I actually think, and I’ll listen to you about what I should be arguing. I’ll be the evil feminist who wants to take the sexy anime girls away, and you can be the enlightened counter feminist, who knows that women are the real sexists. I’ll make sure not to overstep my boundaries by having an opinion that doesn’t conform to your ideas of what they think. That way, you don’t have to bother pretending to read what I’m saying, or attempting to actually think critically if I hold the positions you say I do, and can simply clap back at me with your canned responses. And then I’ll graciously let you get the last word in so you can pat yourself on the back and be assured you won. Won’t that be nice? |
|
Aditya_Dobhada said: @MoltenLemonMeta and @LostSpectre Please stop posting your arguments over here and continue your banter elsewhere. Uhm, wasn't this the intended effect of you making this thread to begin with? |
 |
| @Aditya_Dobhada Yeah I got that bit. What shows are you watching? Me personally, I can only think of one show this happens in. I could be wrong, plenty of anime i don't watch. But provide me with a few examples, please. |
MAFTY - No Exceptions To The Rules |
| @MoltenLemonMeta - Sorry, that would actually have something to do with the comment you originally quoted, since I made it clear that I was referencing sexual objectification, which you have said almost nothing about it, despite name dropping me, and proceeding to berate my comment, that you have yet to actually comprehend to begin with. I don't even know what we're talking about anymore at this point. Nearly all of your comments towards me seem to be built upon your false assumptions. You've demonstrated this repeatedly by not understanding why the the objectification of humans cannot be applied to fictional objects/entities. You brought me into this, so you should prove that you understand what my statement means, and then why it's false. Otherwise, just stop. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
| It depends on the scenario if it's really objectification or not: If the mc thinks of the girl as some precious gem that requires protection and always seems to be protecting her, then that could be objectification because of it's portrayal of women. If the mc wants to protect and help a girl in her times of need, you can't call that objectification because that's out of genuine care or even love. In my opinion it shouldn't matter. When your protecting someone you care about, your doing the right thing, and gender makes no difference when your doing the right thing. Now be honest, if majority of you here watched an anime with the opposite scenario, where the girl is constantly saving the guy and wants to protect him, you might be turned off and dislike it. That might be why you don't see the "reverse damsel in distress" trope much in anime. Example, Shikimori-san used this reverse troupe and got backlash from a lot of viewers who are hating on the mc for being weak. |
PriinceYukiMay 5, 2022 1:03 PM
  ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ Don't try and get me to cook I can take care of anything else but not that ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ |
Aditya_Dobhada said: !!!READ THIS BEFORE POSTING!!! I mean a strong, confident girl/woman more than capable of handling herself alone (in the given situation) finds herself, through unfair means, under the grasp of the villain and then enters the “hero” saving her from him in a supposedly “cool” way. I think this trope is outdated and is still being overused. I would like to make it clear that I am not against them being saved, I just hate how they always end in a "Damsel in Distress" situation, through events that either don't make sense or are really convenient. And yes. Teamwork is required. I am not asking for all their fights to be 1 vs 1 or the female side character to defeat the main bad guy, BUT not all fights are main fights. Please feel free to put forward your opinions. This was probably my biggest complaint with the last half of the first season of Sword Art Online. The first half started so strong, and the last half just devolved into these types of tropes again. |
 |
Aditya_Dobhada said: Well I didn't expect it to get this heated. Yaa I'll close the thread tmrw. I have gotten some genuinely good answers n suggestions. Kinda hard to believe you didn't intentionally make this a bait thread, considering you used the "o" word in the title.. |
|
| What the hell happened to creativity? Doesn't this work both ways? Elfen Lied, Mirai Nikki, Deadman Wonderland, hell even AOT lmao, to name a few. Sure, I'd imagine that the male saving female overpowers, but it isn't like the reverse is not true. There is no real issue with this trope inherently in itself literally--saving people is good, right? And I don't think it necessarily trying to present women as being something to be awarded for just being the guy who saved the day. It isn't a 1:1 corresponding thing where what is being told on anime then has an effect on people irl, but I know that is going on a tangent. >I just hate how they always end in a "Damsel in Distress" situation, through events that either don't make sense or are really convenient. That is not exactly an issue with the concept, but an issue with how it is written into the story or in other words, a writing issue. This post is just going on about preferences rather than legitimate problems. I'd love to call this obvious bait and a true MAL moment that this thread is alive, but that word doesn't have too much weight to it lol. It also occured to me that I don't remember seeing something like this happen so blatantly in my anime life. Sure, I haven't watched a lot, but in todays time it seems as if in anime like MHA and the likes, the male mc is not winning over the girl from literally just saving her. They usually get saved and that's the end of that. They go on and train to become to giga superhero after. Feelings usually develop at the start or along the way before said event happens. So idk. Is what you are saying even that prominent? Sounds like shit out of https://myanimelist.net/anime/2550/Onboro_Film or some 50s Disney movie. |
NextUniverseMay 5, 2022 2:19 PM
SleepySera said: BilboBaggins365 said: Probably one of the best fantasy adventure stories I have enjoyed in this medium is Yona of the Dawn where the MC at the start is a Damsel and it makes sense why she kinda is useless but over time finds competence while still often being saved by her hot male harem. That's fun and most female fans must enjoy it as it was a decently popular shojo manga. I don't think anyone has a problem with it as long as it makes sense within the plot. I love Akatsuki no Yona because I love her development as a character. When she starts out as a damsel it makes sense because of her sheltered upbringing, and once she becomes more capable, it also makes sense that she gets into problematic situations more often that she lacks the physical strength to solve herself - which then causes further development as she learns more clearly what she can do herself, what she needs to rely on others for (something a leader should learn anyways) and ways to solve situations that don't require direct, physical confrontation. It becomes frustrating when it goes AGAINST the supposed traits of the character though, as described in the OP's post. To give an example: I'm gonna be biased here and say I don't see this kind of stuff much in manga/anime created by women for the same demographic. In series like Fullmetal Alchemist or Katekyo Hitman Reborn, the female characters are ACTUALLY capable at their own stuff (like how Winry is a great automail mechanic, Hawkeye is a capable soldier, and Kyoko and Haru do their best to support everyone by taking over all non-combat duties, also I-pin being just as useful in a fight as Lambo), damsel in distress situations are rare if they exist at all and when they do, they make sense because the girl in question is a civilian with no combat inclinations. But in most works, it seems the creator liked the idea of a strong, cool woman so he added one in theory, but then was unwilling to actually allow her to be capable in the narrative, so you get all these SUPPOSEDLY hypercompetent ladies that ditzily fall from one rescue situation into another and it's just frustrating. Well it goes back to what is the issue the trope or the execution? It's mainly the execution. That is all I am saying. People throw out x trope is problematic or x content is problematic or bad or whatever. In pretty much almost every case it's not the trope it's bad writing. So why complain about the trope? Just complain about how the trope is misused and explain how you think it should be. Edit: Also why did this derail into talking about sexual objectification lol. The most famous cases of the damsel in distress trope are in Disney children's films. Anyway it's stupid to talk about "objectification" in regards to fiction as some have said you can't objectify what is an object. There is just only good or bad writing. Good or bad characterization. You can do all that and still create objects of desire for your fanbase if that is what you want to do. Hentai honestly has been at times more successful at good female characterization than some stuff out there. Ultimately not shocking this thread went straight off topic and derailed into nothing but adhoms and self righteous morons with the need to project how righteous they are. Surprised this thread wasn't shut down yet. Wonder if MAL's mods are finally starting to let to the toxicty flow lol. |
BilboBaggins365May 5, 2022 3:11 PM
| This isn't just happening in anime, basically all media. |
Eprico said: EdgyLord666 said: Actually that show flips the premise around entirely and it's more about the female lead constantly saving the male lead because she's so cool and epic and not like the other girlsYeah, it's quite overused. There's literally an anime airing this season with this trope as the premise, Shikimori-san everyone? I know, I'm just being sarcastic by giving an example of "men being objectified as something to be protected by the women". |
More topics from this board
» Recommendations of DisappointmentJaaShooUhh - Yesterday |
43 |
by SpiderMiles3523
»»
15 minutes ago |
|
» Who are your favorite silent characters and why?JaaShooUhh - Yesterday |
7 |
by Zarutaku
»»
23 minutes ago |
|
» Anime recommandations for a first-timerWickedFM - 8 hours ago |
17 |
by DigiCat
»»
28 minutes ago |
|
» Old OVAsJoeChip - Yesterday |
29 |
by EcchiGodMamster
»»
1 hour ago |
|
Poll: » Do you think that hype is a bad thing? ( 1 2 )fluffycow17 - Apr 20, 2022 |
50 |
by velvetnyan
»»
1 hour ago |